Mel White Believes in Scriptural Inerrancy?

[Experiment with Truth]

The only alternative to Tradition is a poor tradition. When Christ prayed that we "may all be one, as you Father, are in me, and I in You", this prayer is not fulfilled by everyone worshiping differently and creating their own rituals. The many varied forms of ritual within actually divide us and does not make us One. There is not "Unity in Diversity". Diversity in worship is the by product of fierce self-directed and self-concerned individualism. And each of us pursuing our own Scriptural interpretation makes each of us a Pope unto ourselves! And what is evident is we seek the interpretation we like best. I for one am not willing to be so bold as to say I have the correct interpretation of Scripture. I must submit my will to Christ's Church.

This is why gay marriage rituals mean little to those outside their immediate community and mean nothing to the Church in which marriage is a Sacrament. Sacraments bind us with the Saints, past, present, and future. The Truth handed down to us does not change. The only change by the Holy Spirit is the change he brings in our lives to know the Truth. Otherwise what was revealed to the Saints in a prior age was not Truth, but only a small portion of the Truth.

The only alternative to this is to believe that God makes us all new and we, in the modern age, are much better than our forefathers because we are so much more wise and knowledgeable than they. But knowledge brings us nothing or very little in the Spiritual world, for the true faith can be held by a Child, as Christ said. In fact, knowledge and erudition can be a big hinderance and lead us away from the Truth.

To search the Scriptures through prayer and meditation is only good if it brings you to the One Truth. You could be praying and meditating on the wrong things! The Holy Spirity will lead one to the One. One person in here summarized this belief as, "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it." I prefer, "God revealed the Way." And "Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever." This is much better than "God revealed something, but none of us truly understand nor those before us truly understood what he meant. So, what would you like to believe? Anything you want too?"

[simpleman]

Originally Posted by tdogg

You say that you never hurt any gay people. Then you say you believe homosexuality is wrong, meaning you believe we are wrong. Then you use terms that offend and hurt gay people (lifestyle). This hurts gay people EWT. So you have most likely hurt gay people in your life.

In case anybody was wondering, it's responses like this that make me not feel like sharing anything other than opinions on this board. If EWT had simply left out "I believe being gay is wrong". Everybody would have hailed him as an open-minded loving, giving, caring person. What a guy to have sought a real guru! But instead he gets the same response that anyone else who has that belief gets. "You are hurting gay people, you have hurt gay people, and if you don't be careful with your words, you will end up hurting more gay people".

Why can't that one difference be overlooked? My uncle is a thrice-divorced adulterer, but do I think my uncle is a "wrong" person? Of course not! I love my uncle, but he's made some mistakes. Do I love my uncle less? NO! Do my feelings hurt my uncle? Maybe. Should I decide that divorce and adultery are acceptable in order to keep from hurting my uncle's feelings? No.

[wmanion]

Colossians 2:8 Parallel Translations

NASB: See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. (NASB ©1995)
GWT: Be careful not to let anyone rob you of this faith through a shallow and misleading philosophy. Such a person follows human traditions and the world's way of doing things rather than following Christ.(GOD'S WORD®)
KJV: Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
ASV: Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ:
BBE: Take care that no one takes you away by force, through man's wisdom and deceit, going after the beliefs of men and the theories of the world, and not after Christ:
DBY: See that there be no one who shall lead you away as a prey through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the teaching of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ.
ERV: Take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ:
WEY: Take care lest there be some one who leads you away as prisoners by means of his philosophy and idle fancies, following human traditions and the world's crude notions instead of following Christ.
WBS: Beware lest any man make a prey of you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
WEB: Be careful that you don't let anyone rob you through his philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the elements of the world, and not after Christ.
YLT: See that no one shall be carrying you away as spoil through the philosophy and vain deceit, according to the deliverance of men, according to the rudiments of the world, and not according to Christ,

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by simpleman

In case anybody was wondering, it's responses like this that make me not feel like sharing anything other than opinions on this board. If EWT had simply left out "I believe being gay is wrong". Everybody would have hailed him as an open-minded loving, giving, caring person. What a guy to have sought a real guru! But instead he gets the same response that anyone else who has that belief gets. "You are hurting gay people, you have hurt gay people, and if you don't be careful with your words, you will end up hurting more gay people".

Why can't that one difference be overlooked? My uncle is a thrice-divorced adulterer, but do I think my uncle is a "wrong" person? Of course not! I love my uncle, but he's made some mistakes. Do I love my uncle less? NO! Do my feelings hurt my uncle? Maybe. Should I decide that divorce and adultery are acceptable in order to keep from hurting my uncle's feelings? No.

OK Simpleman.. we get it. THIS is the reason you don't want to share opinions (though it doesn't seem to stop you from DOING it.)

What is it that keeps you from LISTENING TO OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THEIR EXPERIENCE????

People tell you over and over and over and over but you don't get it. Is it because you don't WANT to get it for some reason?

Sigh...

Ok... Once more into the breach!


Your Uncle is a serial adulterer. by which you mean that he violates his marriage vows repeatedly. That is despicable Behavior

I am a gay man. THIS IS AN HONORABLE, MORAL, ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTIC of my BEING

To say that "being gay is wrong" is not the same as saying "committing adultery is wrong"

To say that "being gay is wrong" is EXACTLY the same as saying that "being Black, or Asian, or left handed is wrong" You CANNOT say that without disrespecting WHO I AM.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION. It is a matter of MY LIFE, MY EXISTENCE, MY ESSENTIAL NATURE AND IDENTITY.


In case you haven't paid attention: I am a gay man. I am married for 23.5 years to a woman. I am a father of 3 sons. I am a pillar of my community. I am a leader that others follow. I am faithful to my marriage vows. I pay my taxes. I mostly obey the speed liimit (give or take 8mph). I have been gay since BEFORE puberty. as a child I had HUGE crushes on other boys. As an adolescent I sexually desired other boys and had no real interest in girls, as a young adult I struggled, prayed, begged for healing, and considered suicide as ways to escape my gayness. I could no more escape my gayness than I could escape my shadow or take off my fingerprints. IT IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF WHO I AM.

Stop comparing me to an adulterous uncle !!!!!

Stop comparing me to theives, liars, murderers and other criminals !!!!

Stop doing these things or GO AWAY !!!!

[u-dog]

Originally Posted by antonyh

If you read Thomas E. Schmidt who has a Ph.D. from Cambridge in New Testament, he in good conscience believes that Romans 1 condemns homosexuality. His exegesis is not shoddy at all. He even admits to his Evangelical presuppositions in the preface.

My point is simply that if you view the Bible as a human response to God, then you don't have to worry who is right or wrong in the exegetical debate. You recognize the true nature of the Bible...a fallible, human book reflective of the problems of the human race.

But I DON't believe that. It is partially that. but it is also a vehicle by which the Holy Spirit conveys the Word of God to us. So "writing it off" as merely a human response doesn't work.

I am not familiar with Dr. Schidt's work. I am familiar with Dr Robert Jewett's work on Romans (professor at Wheaton College or Garrett Seminary... or both).

He argues that Romans 1 is just a piece of a larger argument against idolatry of the Law on the part of the Jewish Christians in the Roman church. He begins this argument by raising up charges against gentile morality (not necessarily gentile christians, just the larger gentile culture of Rome) his intention is to get the jewish Christians riled up and agreeing that these are terrible things. We (in the 21st century) really don't KNOW what the terrible things were. only that they involved males with males and females with females. the Romans knew though and thats all that matters.

Paul then goes on to show how the REAL problem stems from Idolatry.

That is usually where conservatives stop reading. Perhaps Dr. Schmidt stops there too. I don't know. Jewett argues that the rhetorical structure of Paul's argument carries over into Chapter 2 where Paul suddenly whirls on the Jewish Christians (who presumably are cheering Paul on) and accuses them of the same sin (idolatry, not whatever nasty stuff the Gentile Romans are doing.) Only they are committing an idolatry of THE LAW.

The irony is that if contemporary conservative Christians REALLY read the WHOLE argument they would know that it is THEY that are the real target of Paul's brilliant and subtle rhetoric. It is they that are involved in the sin that Paul is identifying. It is THEY that are making a graven idle out of scripture.

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by simpleman

In case anybody was wondering, it's responses like this that make me not feel like sharing anything other than opinions on this board. If EWT had simply left out "I believe being gay is wrong". Everybody would have hailed him as an open-minded loving, giving, caring person. What a guy to have sought a real guru! But instead he gets the same response that anyone else who has that belief gets. "You are hurting gay people, you have hurt gay people, and if you don't be careful with your words, you will end up hurting more gay people".

Why can't that one difference be overlooked? My uncle is a thrice-divorced adulterer, but do I think my uncle is a "wrong" person? Of course not! I love my uncle, but he's made some mistakes. Do I love my uncle less? NO! Do my feelings hurt my uncle? Maybe. Should I decide that divorce and adultery are acceptable in order to keep from hurting my uncle's feelings? No.

I believe Simple is not listening. But others may be, so I too will respond to this.

RE: the first paragraph, see U-dog's response above. See from U-dog's words that these statements DO hurt gay people. It hurts people to be told that their being is "wrong," whether you understand that it does or not. The hurt still happens. If we tell such things to a small child, the hurt is magnified to great harm.

We still seem not to "get" that gay people are not all adults. They are gay as children. I remember back to the 7th or 8th grade when one day, hugging an 11 year-old 6th grade friend after a performance, it suddenly hit me like lightning that the sweet, skinny little 11 year old in my arms was a gay child. That was when my understanding of homosexuality - and homophobia - turned on its head. When I knew that all the condemnation (and outright hatred) towards homosexuals was aimed at someone's innocent little boy.

It cannot be overlooked because that belief teaches our own children they are "abominable" just for being themselves, and prompts them to try to destroy themselvs (and some do).

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by u-dog

OK Simpleman.. we get it. THIS is the reason you don't want to share opinions (though it doesn't seem to stop you from DOING it.)

What is it that keeps you from LISTENING TO OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THEIR EXPERIENCE????

People tell you over and over and over and over but you don't get it. Is it because you don't WANT to get it for some reason?

Sigh...

Ok... Once more into the breach!


Your Uncle is a serial adulterer. by which you mean that he violates his marriage vows repeatedly. That is despicable Behavior

I am a gay man. THIS IS AN HONORABLE, MORAL, ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTIC of my BEING

To say that "being gay is wrong" is not the same as saying "committing adultery is wrong"

To say that "being gay is wrong" is EXACTLY the same as saying that "being Black, or Asian, or left handed is wrong" You CANNOT say that without disrespecting WHO I AM.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION. It is a matter of MY LIFE, MY EXISTENCE, MY ESSENTIAL NATURE AND IDENTITY.


In case you haven't paid attention: I am a gay man. I am married for 23.5 years to a woman. I am a father of 3 sons. I am a pillar of my community. I am a leader that others follow. I am faithful to my marriage vows. I pay my taxes. I mostly obey the speed liimit (give or take 8mph). I have been gay since BEFORE puberty. as a child I had HUGE crushes on other boys. As an adolescent I sexually desired other boys and had no real interest in girls, as a young adult I struggled, prayed, begged for healing, and considered suicide as ways to escape my gayness. I could no more escape my gayness than I could escape my shadow or take off my fingerprints. IT IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF WHO I AM.

Stop comparing me to an adulterous uncle !!!!!

Stop comparing me to theives, liars, murderers and other criminals !!!!

Stop doing these things or GO AWAY !!!!

Dave,

Bravo for your heartfelt and courageous words.
It hurts like hell to know that some readers will dismiss or even scoff at them.

I'm standing right next to you seconding everything you've written above.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by u-dog

But I DON't believe that. It is partially that. but it is also a vehicle by which the Holy Spirit conveys the Word of God to us. So "writing it off" as merely a human response doesn't work.

I think that is where we probably differ. I think of the Bible as a human book. Borg also believes that the Bible is a human response to God. I guess that puts me at the outer fringe of Christian theology. I respect your views, I once held them, but I've changed.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Zerbie

Dave,

Bravo for your heartfelt and courageous words.
It hurts like hell to know that some readers will dismiss or even scoff at them.

I'm standing right next to you seconding everything you've written above.

Dave,

I'm with Zerbie and you on this. I've been told that being gay is a problem like alcoholism and I find it deeply insulting. So thank you for saying what you said.

Antony

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Experiment with Truth

The only alternative to this is to believe that God makes us all new and we, in the modern age, are much better than our forefathers because we are so much more wise and knowledgeable than they. But knowledge brings us nothing or very little in the Spiritual world, for the true faith can be held by a Child, as Christ said. In fact, knowledge and erudition can be a big hinderance and lead us away from the Truth.

We are smarter in the modern age. We're children of the Enlightenment. A whole new approach to knowledge has dawned. Now we study nature on it's own terms, not through the lens of a human book and the authority of the Pope.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by antonyh

We are smarter in the modern age. We're children of the Enlightenment. A whole new approach to knowledge has dawned. Now we study nature on it's own terms, not through the lens of a human book and the authority of the Pope.

While I sympathize with your viewpoint, there are a couple of problems:

1) There were "smart people" before the Enlightenment. Some of them got burned at the stake, probably. There's even some "enlightened thought" found in the Scriptures, even from Paul.

2) The Enlightenment is in some trouble. For instance, we have an anti-science, anti-enlightenment crowd in power in the White House right now, some of whom are "pretty smart." If they had their way, the Enlightenment would be relegated to the past, and "faith-based" "science", law and government would be the "smart new thing." Regent University Law School is planning to turn out the "smart" people who are going to try to bury the Enlightenment. Intellectuals speak of a "post-modern" age that will succede the "modern" age of Enlightenment--what that age will look like is a matter of dispute.

You are right, Antony, that because some viewpoint is held by "tradition" is no real argument. It is an "argument from authority," which is no real argument. That tradition and some scripture hold that men should be the "head" of their households and women, children and slaves should be subordinate is no justification whatsovever for women's subordination and slavery.

The "place" of LGBT people is very much tied into the "tradition" of patriarchy and its related gender roles. That is why we see all these issues: women, slaves and LGBT people becoming issues as the Enlightenment struggles with Tradition.

But that is not to say that modern people are "smart" and ancient people "dumb," nor that the Enlightenment couldn't be replaced by another worldview that is hostile to the Enlightenment. Some would argue that the Islamic world rejected the Enlightenment and ancient scientific knowledge passed from the Islamic world to go on to "enlighten" the West. What the Islamic world needs is another dose of the enlightenment, and that is happening in some quarters.

Maybe in the future the U.S. will reject the Enlightenment and it will pass on to Europe or China. The U.S. empire will decline and will be replaced by Europe or China as the "most advanced" world power.

Steven Webster

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

While I sympathize with your viewpoint, there are a couple of problems:

1) There were "smart people" before the Enlightenment. Some of them got burned at the stake, probably. There's even some "enlightened thought" found in the Scriptures, even from Paul.

2) The Enlightenment is in some trouble. For instance, we have an anti-science, anti-enlightenment crowd in power in the White House right now, some of whom are "pretty smart." If they had their way, the Enlightenment would be relegated to the past, and "faith-based" "science", law and government would be the "smart new thing." Regent University Law School is planning to turn out the "smart" people who are going to try to bury the Enlightenment. Intellectuals speak of a "post-modern" age that will succede the "modern" age of Enlightenment--what that age will look like is a matter of dispute.

You are right, Antony, that because some viewpoint is held by "tradition" is no real argument. It is an "argument from authority," which is no real argument. That tradition and some scripture hold that men should be the "head" of their households and women, children and slaves should be subordinate is no justification whatsovever for women's subordination and slavery.

The "place" of LGBT people is very much tied into the "tradition" of patriarchy and its related gender roles. That is why we see all these issues: women, slaves and LGBT people becoming issues as the Enlightenment struggles with Tradition.

But that is not to say that modern people are "smart" and ancient people "dumb," nor that the Enlightenment couldn't be replaced by another worldview that is hostile to the Enlightenment. Some would argue that the Islamic world rejected the Enlightenment and ancient scientific knowledge passed from the Islamic world to go on to "enlighten" the West. What the Islamic world needs is another dose of the enlightenment, and that is happening in some quarters.

Maybe in the future the U.S. will reject the Enlightenment and it will pass on to Europe or China. The U.S. empire will decline and will be replaced by Europe or China as the "most advanced" world power.

Steven Webster

I find myself agreeing with all you say. I'm simply saying that the Enlightenment taught us to study nature on it's own terms instead of explaining the world deductively through classical texts (i.e. divine, authoritative revelation). By "smart" I simply meant that we have these new insights to work with.

And you're right, these new insights are under aggressive attack throughout the world.

My Episcopalian priest used to tell us that revelation is ongoing and I like to believe that the Enlightenment was from God.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by antonyh

I find myself agreeing with all you say. I'm simply saying that the Enlightenment taught us to study nature on it's own terms instead of explaining the world deductively through classical texts (i.e. divine, authoritative revelation). By "smart" I simply meant that we have these new insights to work with.

And you're right, these new insights are under aggressive attack throughout the world.

My Episcopalian priest used to tell us that revelation is ongoing and I like to believe that the Enlightenment was from God.

Antony,

You probably know that Anglican Tradition (the "T" word again!) developed during the Age of Enlightenment and does theology by reference to three criteria: Scripture, Tradition and Reason. Reason is the part that I believe the Enlightenment added.

In my own Methodist tradition we added Experience to Scripture, Tradition and Reason--also an Enlightenment element. But, as I say, there are smart people who want to reject the Enlightenment and embrace authority rather than reason or experience. I think it's a dangerous movement.

God's revelation does continue in the everyday developments of reason and experience, otherwise we'd be worshipping a very dead God indeed.

Steven Webster

[tdogg]

Originally Posted by simpleman

In case anybody was wondering, it's responses like this that make me not feel like sharing anything other than opinions on this board. If EWT had simply left out "I believe being gay is wrong". Everybody would have hailed him as an open-minded loving, giving, caring person. What a guy to have sought a real guru! But instead he gets the same response that anyone else who has that belief gets. "You are hurting gay people, you have hurt gay people, and if you don't be careful with your words, you will end up hurting more gay people".

Why can't that one difference be overlooked? My uncle is a thrice-divorced adulterer, but do I think my uncle is a "wrong" person? Of course not! I love my uncle, but he's made some mistakes. Do I love my uncle less? NO! Do my feelings hurt my uncle? Maybe. Should I decide that divorce and adultery are acceptable in order to keep from hurting my uncle's feelings? No.

So, now that you know more about us, what words hurt us, what makes us feel disrespected...is it too much to ask that you word your posts accordingly? If something you are saying hurts another person, what problem would it be for you to adjust how you say something?

Stop with the 'lifestyle' bit. We have explained to you how it's NOT a lifestyle. Why would you want to continue to use this word when you KNOW it's disrespectful and hurtful? Why can't you figure it out, after being told time and again, it's HOW WE ARE BORN, WHO WE ARE. Not a decision we make cause we think it's cool or something.

We've explained how disrespectful, ignorant and hurtful it is when you categorize our being gay with crimes and wrong-doing. So, why do you continue to do this? Why would you explain about your uncle's adultery in the same breath you discuss 'gay'? We've told you how we feel about that, so the logical and respectful thing to do is to NOT do that.

[Zerbie]

Originally Posted by tdogg

So, now that you know more about us, what words hurt us, what makes us feel disrespected...is it too much to ask that you word your posts accordingly? If something you are saying hurts another person, what problem would it be for you to adjust how you say something?

Stop with the 'lifestyle' bit. We have explained to you how it's NOT a lifestyle. Why would you want to continue to use this word when you KNOW it's disrespectful and hurtful? Why can't you figure it out, after being told time and again, it's HOW WE ARE BORN, WHO WE ARE. Not a decision we make cause we think it's cool or something.

We've explained how disrespectful, ignorant and hurtful it is when you categorize our being gay with crimes and wrong-doing. So, why do you continue to do this? Why would you explain about your uncle's adultery in the same breath you discuss 'gay'? We've told you how we feel about that, so the logical and respectful thing to do is to NOT do that.

Brava, Tdogg!



An excellent union of passion and logic!

I thank you so much for saying so, because Simple's words all come along with an undercurrent of contempt for gay people, even though he does not express any directly in posts. Nevertheless, they communicate contempt and disregard.

Thanks for setting things straight, T.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Antony,

You probably know that Anglican Tradition (the "T" word again!) developed during the Age of Enlightenment and does theology by reference to three criteria: Scripture, Tradition and Reason. Reason is the part that I believe the Enlightenment added.

In my own Methodist tradition we added Experience to Scripture, Tradition and Reason--also an Enlightenment element. But, as I say, there are smart people who want to reject the Enlightenment and embrace authority rather than reason or experience. I think it's a dangerous movement.

God's revelation does continue in the everyday developments of reason and experience, otherwise we'd be worshipping a very dead God indeed.

Steven Webster

I guess I've become uncomfortable adding Scripture and Tradition to the conversation. The Bible has plenty of great things to say, but so does Shakespeare.

[Steven E. Webster]

Originally Posted by antonyh

I guess I've become uncomfortable adding Scripture and Tradition to the conversation. The Bible has plenty of great things to say, but so does Shakespeare.

Antony,
You are right, we ought to be uncomfortable adding Scripture and Tradition to the conversation. That is what the "hermeneutic of suspicion" is about that has been discussed elsewhere here. We need to be suspicious--good old Enlightenment skepticism. The traditional interpreters of scripture have had their biases and they've used the "argument from authority" to the disadvantage of those marginalized in society.

There is also a "hermeneutic of recovery" that empowers women, LGBT people and other disfavored minorities to find the alternative and suppressed voices in Scripture and Tradition. That involves bringing reason and the minority experience to bear on Scripture and Tradition.

The fault is not entirely with scripture and tradition, but with those who hold the positions of the "authoritative interpreters of scripture." The New Interpreter's Bible by Abingdon Press of the United Methodist publishing house, a study bible with extensive notes and commentary, has the commentary on the Gospel of Mark by the lesbian-feminist Southern Baptist New Testament scholar Mary A. Tolbert (see link here http://clgs.org/2/2_3_1.html)

Scripture and Tradition are no longer the sole property of the homophobes! They just haven't got use to it yet!

Steven Webster

[simpleman]

Originally Posted by u-dog

OK Simpleman.. we get it. THIS is the reason you don't want to share opinions (though it doesn't seem to stop you from DOING it.)

I said that this was why I didn't want to share anything other than opinions. (i.e. life story, personal experiences, etc.) Because it seems that the response to EWT's personal story (which was very open and honest, btw) was diluted by the fact that his journey has led him to believe that being gay is wrong.

What is it that keeps you from LISTENING TO OTHER PEOPLES OPINIONS AND MORE IMPORTANTLY THEIR EXPERIENCE????

I do listen to these things. Why does this mean I automatically must change my religious beliefs?
[quote}
People tell you over and over and over and over but you don't get it. Is it because you don't WANT to get it for some reason?[/quote}
I suppose I will never "get it". Because "get it" means "change your beliefs on homosexuality. Now." In other words, my beliefs cannot be respected, because they are fundamentally in opposition to who you are. I get that, but I don't get why you have to shut me out based upon this. Why you don't accept me, or EWT, with our beliefs, is what I don't get.

Your Uncle is a serial adulterer. by which you mean that he violates his marriage vows repeatedly. That is despicable Behavior


I am a gay man. THIS IS AN HONORABLE, MORAL, ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTIC of my BEING

So I suppose that my uncle is not characteristically unfaithful, only despicable? I'm overweight, so that means that it isn't my fault, but rather that I am honorably, morally, essentially, and characteristically predisposed to eating food, and so I should embrace that, and continue to be overweight? I don't know, it all depends on one's personal beliefs. If you believe that eating too much, or adultery, or homosexuality is innate to a person, then none of these things are wrong. Your belief that homosexuality is innate, and a part of you, should not keep you from being able to speak on important issues, or be homosexual, or get married, or work, or be in the military, so my belief that homosexuality is wrong shouldn't keep me from discussing issues, either.

To say that "being gay is wrong" is not the same as saying "committing adultery is wrong"

To say that "being gay is wrong" is EXACTLY the same as saying that "being Black, or Asian, or left handed is wrong" You CANNOT say that without disrespecting WHO I AM.

Only if you believe that being gay is not wrong. You are entitled to your belief, and I respect you and your belief. I disagree with you. Maybe we agree on something else? We will never know, because no one will listen to me unless I change my beliefs about being gay.

IT IS NOT A MATTER OF OPINION. It is a matter of MY LIFE, MY EXISTENCE, MY ESSENTIAL NATURE AND IDENTITY.
In case you haven't paid attention: I am a gay man. I am married for 23.5 years to a woman. I am a father of 3 sons. I am a pillar of my community. I am a leader that others follow. I am faithful to my marriage vows. I pay my taxes. I mostly obey the speed liimit (give or take 8mph). I have been gay since BEFORE puberty. as a child I had HUGE crushes on other boys. As an adolescent I sexually desired other boys and had no real interest in girls, as a young adult I struggled, prayed, begged for healing, and considered suicide as ways to escape my gayness. I could no more escape my gayness than I could escape my shadow or take off my fingerprints. IT IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF WHO I AM.

I have paid attention. You also sat down with your children recently to tell them that you are gay. I have the utmost respect for your leadership skills. I respect your role in your community. I'm glad that you feel a duty and commitment to the people in your family and in your community. I don't consider your homosexuality to have anything to do with these things. I also wouldn't want you to be removed from any position you might hold. You sound like a great fellow. Does this mean that you will change my religious beliefs? Doubtful. Will I listen to you? Yes, because you have proven to be a person that I would discuss various issues with. I wish you would do the same with me, regardless of my beliefs. Or must I simply change my beliefs? Is that what it will take?

Stop comparing me to an adulterous uncle !!!!!

Stop comparing me to theives, liars, murderers and other criminals !!!!

Stop doing these things or GO AWAY !!!!

I'll try. But they aren't meant to be offensive (but they are, I'm sorry, I just like to be honest to people about myself and my beliefs). Can you bear with me? Or will you just continue to call me a jerk?

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by Steven E. Webster

Scripture and Tradition are no longer the sole property of the homophobes! They just haven't got use to it yet!

That statement alone could get me reading the Bible again.

[antonyh]

Originally Posted by simpleman

Only if you believe that being gay is not wrong. You are entitled to your belief, and I respect you and your belief. I disagree with you.

So why do you believe being gay is wrong?